If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

SJW is not an actual thing that exists. It's not a descriptive term that actually describes a class of people.

Stop fomenting fake hate.

Well, ideally each team should choose its own name, like pro-Life and pro-Choice, but 'SJW' seems to be where it's at. Probably SJWs should've put more effort into choosing and promoting a name of their choice if they didn't want to be known as SJWs. Obamacare!

Incidentally, do we have a name for the other team yet? Team MRAs? Team Dudebros? With major corporations now choosing sides, we do need to bring some structure to the whole affair.

Of course there are teams. Sure, you can try and chart a middle course, but the more acrimonious the situation becomes, the more that just translates to pissing off everybody. When it comes time to pick up a gun, you will choose a side.

Originally Posted by Smashbox

Also, real actual people don't make purchasing decisions based on shit like this.

SJW is not an actual thing that exists. It's not a descriptive term that actually describes a class of people.

They are a thing... they are on the extreme, yes, but they do exist. They're the ones who are constantly looking to start fights over (non)issues, hence the "warrior" appellation. Like that saying about if you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail... If you're an SJW everything is an act of war and aggression and shall be met as such.

They are the extremists though, and bringing them up is a good way to stifle debate.

Originally Posted by Hypernetic

I just have an opinion different to your own. Circle jerking is good for no one, be glad somebody isn't afraid to disagree with women on the internet.

That guy goes on to destroy a GTA V disc in order to show his burning hate for this game. He flat out tells journalists to be biased, to have an agenda, to not be impartial and to be swayed by merchandise. He then calls gamers "dishonest sacks of hot garbage who should be broken on racks".

So yeah, I understand intel for not wanting to be associated with people calling their target group "obtuse shitslingers" and "lonely basement kids".

The 'teams' are so obvious and clearly delineated that I'd put good money that you can extrapolate with 70% accuracy or better someone's basic position on Israel/Palestine from their position on GamerGate.

(Yes, I'm partly taking the piss in this thread by playing up an already absurd situation even further, but I'm also making serious comments along the way re: tribalism, ethics, etc.)

Wow. I guess it goes to show what organized internet harassment can accomplish, but it'd fairly pathetic on Intel's part.

Remember, these guys are the true gamers and are really dismantling the image they have of being angry, basement dwelling babies with their campaigns of really reaching out to the other side via the diplomacy of hounding them out of their jobs and homes.

Balance? With sentences like "Those people really need to get laid more often."
And the amazing out of touch with reality:"While those who played games soon discover that there's no community in the world more accepting of everyone and anyone who plays games than players of games"

Not to mention the whole proselytism tone it doesn't seem that's anything close to bring balance to an argument.

Balance? With sentences like "Those people really need to get laid more often."
And the amazing out of touch with reality:"While those who played games soon discover that there's no community in the world more accepting of everyone and anyone who plays games than players of games"

Not to mention the whole proselytism tone it doesn't seem that's anything close to bring balance to an argument.

It's equally slanted than the art technica article, just the opposite direction, so I'd consider it balanced :)